Pages

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Foreign-born as my PM

This is what I wrote in 2003-2004 when Sonia Gandhi was about to become Prime Minister of India. Fortunately, it was Manmohan Singh who became the PM. Whew!

I wrote the following on my white board in my cube. I was working at an Indian company in Bangalore back then.

**
CELEBRATION (Reason: India to be ruled by an Indian-born – for now)

This is purely apolitical (non-political) reason- its do with matters of sovereignty, of self-esteem & self-dignity, and of national security.

**

Some agreed with this message, some did not. Some said that I was a 'true patriot and a true Indian'. I am not sure what means. Such words are quite confusing sometimes. Are you a patriot if you support India and all its policies? If so, does a patriot speak up when some fellow Indians (like in Kashmir and North-east) are being ruled at gunpoint? I would rather not be labeled with any of those adulations. Most of those whom I met in my cube admitted plainly that they haven't given this issue much thought- they did not dwell on it mostly because they thought it was a ‘political’ issue. Indian media refers to it as foreign-born ‘issue’- giving it a political flavor. I think something is an issue when there are different versions to a story- like 'Bofors issue', 'Ayodhya issue', etc. where in people have a different take on it- some believe in it, some are opposed to it. I don’t understand why Sonia Gandhi being 'foreign-born' is an issue? Everybody knows where she is born. There is no contention on that. It’s not an issue, rather it’s a fact we have to deal with.

Indian media quotes phrases from different constitutions of the world and says- '35 countries allow foreign-borns to be their country's leader'. Now, what about the rest-of-180 or odd countries? The news item should have read- '180 countries DO NOT allow a foreign born as their leader'. Lets look at some of these countries that do allow. Take for example, Belgium & Netherlands. While their constitution do not disallow any foreign born, will the people and political parties allow it? How many of Belgium's Prime Ministers were non-European, non-Belgian, non-white, non-Christian, non-Catholic? NONE! So, their constitution might not disallow, but people would not even dream or hallucinate of having a foreign-born individual as their Prime Minister. No constitution explicitly states that a person should not be mentally ill. It’s up to the people to make that judgment. Right here, right now, we are NOT judging. We are just accepting things as they come. US does not allow a foreign-born to become its President. Germany allows any German- he/she could be born anywhere. But to become a German, one of your parents has to be a German. No exceptions on that. Even the third-generation Turkish immigrants are not given German citizenship. They are born and then they die in Germany- but they are still Turkish.

Indians are all welcoming. That's a good trait. Anyone who is married to an Indian is eligible to become an Indian- any one living here for certain period of time is eligible to become an Indian. That’s good. Let Mother Teresa come to India, let Annie Besant come to India, let Katrina Kaif come to India, Let Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan come to India, Let Palestine study in India, let Nepalis work in India. Let Europeans set up Industry in India, let an American become a CEO in India. BUT PLEASE, make some one who is Indian-born our Prime Minister. Is that a lot to ask from our liberal-secular-multilingual Indian media and Congressmen? [Just for the kicks- here is a hypothetical question- would we have a accepted a black Nigerian as our Prime Minister if Rajiv Gandhi was married to one, or a Vietnamese? Think about it].

My opposition to foreign-born as our Prime Minister is simple.

Prime Minister is the supreme leader of India (whether we like to say it that way or not). She is the one who will represent India in all international forums. She will be the one who will be our messenger, our ambassador and our icon. She is the one who will have access to all vital secrets. She is the one who may have to vote against NATO countries (read Italy) in UN. She will be the one who will have to oppose a war led by NATO country. She is the one who will decide the fates of millions in case of a war.

She is raised in a different cultural setting with different value systems, different ethos and pathos. She can't be the one who doesn't know what it means to grow up as an Indian kid. She can't be the one who does not know what it is to be under colonial rule. She can't be the one who doesn't know what it means to be brown.

Some intellectuals reason that 'Sonia is more Indian than many other Indians'. Isn't she the one who ran for cover during Emergency? If I am more European than a European, will Europe allow me as one of their Prime Ministers? Does she know how an Indian mind reacts to an alien war, or a calamity, or an emotional issue?

Its gross ignominy that we had our independence just 50 years ago, and we are already clobbering on the floor to make another European-born as our head. Winston Churchill was opposed to Indian Independence. He said that we would not be able to rule ourselves. He thought that it was European responsibility to rule us. We may prove that he is right. Instead, why can't we celebrate our plurality and liberal attitude now because we have a Muslim President and Sikh PM? That's a great leap for a 50-year old democracy! That’s good enough for us in 50 years. We will have enough time to remove the boundaries of nations, mix all the races in a coffee cup, and throw caste system in to Indian Ocean. For now, I want an Indian-born to be my PM. Is that too much to ask?

PS: I can think of one country that made a foreign born their President. Peru made a Japanese-born their President. When things got tough, he took a plane with all cash, etc, went to Japan, and settled down as Japan's citizen :) So much for being more Peruvian than a Peruvian!

Let me begin on an honest note that I am no Congress supporter...and that I am entitled to my opinions as well....

This is too much of Xenophobia...What cahrecterizes a leader/PM is the integrity and the potential of a person and not his or her origin/gene structure.. If you argue that Sonia Gandhi has little adminstrative abilities to speak off , fine ...she may not be fit for the post of PM.. But the rejection based on nativity is beyond my mode of rationality.

Let me quote ur own statements....

1) "Now, what about the rest-of-150 or odd countries? The news item should have read- '150 countries DO NOT allow a foreign born as their leader'" What if 150 odd countries do not accept a foreign born as their leader ? Does it mean that India should follow the path of this majority? Does it mean that what is not acceptable to most is clearly wrong? Definitely Not..... As you yourself has argued (in another blog) that homosexuality cannot be accepted un-natural just because the majority believes it is....

2) " Germany allows any German- he/she could be born anywhere. But to become a German, one of your parents has to be a German. No exceptions on that. Even the third-generation Turkish immigrants are not given German citizenship. They are born and then they die in Germany- but they are still Turkish."" That is absurd..Germany has proven record of hi-fi xenophobia that had resulted in one of the greatest tragedies humanity has ever faced..If German people cannot accept a Jewish blood or Turkish blood amongst them (forget leadership) , it is their bloody weakness... How can we keep Germany as our ethical/moral benchmark ????

3) ""She is the one who will decide the fates of millions in case of a war. " Here is a blatant questioning of the integrity...If you think she might betray Indian interests so can Manmohan Singh in case of a Sikh Uprising...So can Abdul Kalam in an issue which involves Muslim interests..So could Mahatma Gandhi in an issue relating to Gujarat...Common that sounds absurd..How can the origin of a person decide the integrity factor...

4) " It’s up to the people to make that judgment. Right here, right now, we are NOT judging"

Yes It’s up to the people to make that judgment..and they have made their judgement..the 240 odd congress MPs representing almost half of Indian voter poulation did make their judgement..Thats how it works in a representative democracy.... The PEOPLE DID make their judgement...Not once over and over again..The latest in that sereis...Sonia Gandhi won the by-election in UP with a Whopping (yes it is whopping) four lakh vote majority..The opposing contestant Vinay Katyar (BJP/RSS) had to be satisfied with a few thousands of votes..

5) "Will she brim with pride when India wins World cup?"

Common give me a break....

6) " I can think of one country that made a foreign born their President. Peru made a Japanese-born their President. When things got tough, he took a plane with all cash, etc, went to Japan, and settled down as Japan's citizen"

In the world history I can write and give you a hundred names who have betrayed their country mens trust at the time of crisis (of course all born in the same land)...I can also point out at least a good no of Indian-born PM aspirants who also will do the same in the face of a crisis... Mere probabability can tell u that a generalization cannot be made of a single Japnese leader of Peru...What if no country has dared to keep a foreign-born as their leader? Does it mean it is something that must be abhorred...?

And about the question of Juanita.....To be very honest I dont mind who rules the country be it Hindu,Muslim, Sikh, British, Americans whoever it is ,as long as He/She is committed to the cause of India..As long as His/Her aspirations and views match with the 1 billion poulation..As long as he/she preserves the liberal-secular-multilingual Indian society in all its letter and Spirit..If Madam Juanita lives upto that expectation, Yes..I would embrace her with all my might...

Jayadeep:I wish the world was idealistic. I wish that every country honored a gentlemen agreement not to use nuclear weapons. I wish that every country honored to clean up landmines after their bloody campaigns. I wish every country reduced their green house gases. I wish every country told the truth before invading the war. Unfortunately, the world is not ideal.

I wish countries did not have borders, and was open to all people from all countries. I wish anyone from any country could go to and stand elections in any country, citizenship or not, and become the President or Prime Minister of that country.

But unfortunately I live in the real world. I need to stop dreaming idealistic dreams.

You say: What cahrecterizes a leader/PM is the integrity and the potential of a person and not his or her origin/gene structure.

Really? Who says so? Did Jayadeep make new rules on what characterizes a PM or leader of a nation? Then how come we say that a PM or President should be a citizen of country? Why should a person be a resident of a state before he can become the leader of that state? Why is the origin so important? Why don’t we just throw our constitution into the nearest dustbin and go with what Jayadeep has to say. Let’s put an exam, and whoever scores highest will become the PM of India- no votes no polls, the 'potential' will be decided by the exam.

But the rejection based on nativity is beyond my mode of rationality.

Why don’t you go buy land in Kashmir? Why don’t you contest an election in France? Why don’t you go work for Mossad? If nativity is not in question, what is?

Some of us happen to live in real world, and when we do have our own wonderland, may be, we can get Korean to be our PM- definitely they would have better ‘potential’ than our leaders.

If Madam Juanita lives upto that expectation, Yes..I would embrace her with all my might...

No wonder British ruled for so long. Some of us were sad that British were leaving. They thought British were better rulers. They thought they had better ‘potential’ than us. Why don’t you and others who think like you write a petition to Queen Elizabeth to rule us once again? If needed, you can put her up in elections and vote her to become the Prime Minister. May be she wouldn’t like to rule us, but may be, she will send one of her emissaries to do that job. Oh, BTW, Tony Blair is retiring soon. He has ‘potential’. We could ask him to be our PM. Better still, how about Bill Clinton? I think he is the right ‘potential’.

I have been reading all your posts only from past 1 week.Initially I thought that your blogs and views were expresed amazing.However after seeing reply to Jayadeep.I felt you only see your point.When he writes his view.You scoff at it saying in the "IDEAL WORLD".

But elsewhere all your blogs you keep writing and your wishes would also be the same if it were an Ideal world.

You dont seem to accomodate others view point in blog posts.May be that little indian in you is doing it.

Dear Sujai,I really admire your blog, and you have, besides your analytical ability, a great sense of humour, I believe.

Please just let me correct one thing (not the main issue in your post, anyway): you really can become a German citizen independetly of your lineage, and so the more, if you are a spouse of a German. It takes only 8 years of residence, and, recently a language and allover knowledge test.

What you have do to do, however, is to renounce of your former citizenship. Thus, the Germans do not admit multiple citizenship on a regular basis. This was also the issue that induced a lot of Turks to keep their Turkish passport. It is also a good method of preventing things like in Peru.

This does not mean, however, that Germans would ever elect a foreign-born for president, but for other reasons.

Dear Commenters:Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.